Poll: Roy Moore Opens Up Seven-Point Lead over Democrat Doug Jones in Alabama Senate Race

[roamer_1]

@RetBobbyMI

Now we're on the side of Pelosi and the Dem sex abuser.  This slide to the bottom is a wild ride, lol.

@CatherineofAragon

What are you even talking about? No one is on the side of a sex abuser at all.

[Cyber Liberty]

Bigun wrote:
"I have always known that the good people of Alabama are FAR smarter than the folks in Washington and New York think they are!  I personally cannot wait to see the expression on Mitch McConnell's face as he welcomes Alabama's new Senator to that body!"

A "you read it here first!" prediction:

The really big guns against Mr. Moore are going to be rolled out AFTER he wins the Alabama election.

First, they're going to try to dissuade him from taking his Senate seat with all kinds of threats about "the investigations" that will come if he dares to show up and claim it.

Of course, Mr. Moore ain't gonna back down on these kind of threats, so...

When he DOES enter the Senate to take his seat, expect a hurricane of charges to be thrown against him in an effort to stir up enough votes to expel him. There are already 48 or so "automatic votes" (those of the democrat-communists). But wait and see how many Republicans may jump on the wagon, as well...

It will be interesting to see how much powder they expend against him.

[Bigun]

It will be interesting to see how much powder they expend against him.

And that alone will tell us plenty!

[Frank Cannon]

Roy Moore is up?

Did he walk by a school?

[DiogenesLamp]

@DiogenesLamp

That would be @CatherineofAragon, because, see, when you discuss someone, basic courtesy says you ping them.

I actually still haven't figured out how to do that.   I've tried various things,  but they don't seem to work. 



I figured you would find it directly anyway. 

[DiogenesLamp]

@DiogenesLamp

Moore's a pervert, yep.  I see your conscience is stinging a little.  That's good.

Not even slightly.  I have no problem at all with a 30 year old man dating teenage girls.   That used to be normal in the US of A. 


I also don't believe the two women that claim Moore committed sexual improprieties,  and it appears their stories are falling apart.   

So no,  I don't have an moral qualms with Roy Moore.   

I'll instruct you again to ping me when you discuss me and when you bring over my posts from other threads.  Is there a reason you have trouble doing so?

I've tried to do that in the past,  but I can't figure out how to do it.   I tried putting an @ in front of the name,  but when I do a preview,  it just comes back as a name with a "@"  in front of it,  rather than a hyperlink.    So I tried looking up members numbers,  and putting in "Member=",   but that didn't seem to work either.   

Not sure what's going on,  but I expect someone will tell me eventually.   

[Jazzhead]

You see,  we are "pervert" defenders.   I guess that makes us worse than dirt or something.   

Well, no worse than Democrats.  They defended their pervert 20 years ago, and you're defending your pervert now.   

[skeeter]

Well, no worse than Democrats.  They defended their pervert 20 years ago, and you're defending your pervert now.   

You guys really are too much. So transparent.

[Silver Pines]

@DiogenesLamp

Maybe you’re putting a space between @ and the name?  If you type @membername, you get a prompt with the name in a bar, and you don’t have to finish typing—-just click the bar.

[Silver Pines]

You guys really are too much. So transparent.

@skeeter

I guess “you guys” includes me, so I can’t wait to hear how I’m transparent. 

[skeeter]

@skeeter

I guess “you guys” includes me, so I can’t wait to hear how I’m transparent.

Unless you believe the Clinton and Moore cases are analogous then I wasn't referring to you.

If you do there's nothing then I have nothing to add. There is no basis for further discussion, we exist in alternate universes.

[driftdiver]

Well, no worse than Democrats.  They defended their pervert 20 years ago, and you're defending your pervert now.   

@Jazzhead
Says the guy that defends homosexuals as 'normal'.

[Jazzhead]

@Jazzhead
Says the guy that defends homosexuals as 'normal'.

I've argued that the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection extends to gays who want to marry their adult partners under the civil law.   You're apparently defending a hypocrite who in his thirties made himself a community nuisance picking up young teenagers around town.

Is this the kind of man a Christian conservative should want to defend?  Go ahead and do so, but keep in mind that those who defend Moore sully their own reputations in doing so.   

[RetBobbyMI]

You guys really are too much. So transparent.

Is the definition of transparency being able to see through one ear and out the other? 

[Silver Pines]

Unless you believe the Clinton and Moore cases are analogous then I wasn't referring to you.

If you do there's nothing then I have nothing to add. There is no basis for further discussion, we exist in alternate universes.

@skeeter

Oh, we do.  No doubt about that.

[Silver Pines]

Is the definition of transparency being able to see through one ear and out the other?

@RetBobbyMI

Oh, come on, don’t stop at “you’re stupid if you don’t agree with me.”  Let’s go full Freep, turn off our thinking completely, and call for a ban on anti-Moore speech.

[DiogenesLamp]

Well, no worse than Democrats.  They defended their pervert 20 years ago, and you're defending your pervert now.   

You should keep up.  The accuser's stories are being contradicted by facts and other  witnesses.   What are you going to do when the accusers are discredited?   You've already accepted what they claimed as the truth,   and it looks like you have prejudged the man. 

[DiogenesLamp]

@DiogenesLamp

Maybe you’re putting a space between @ and the name?  If you type @membername, you get a prompt with the name in a bar, and you don’t have to finish typing—-just click the bar.

@CatherineofAragon




I never noticed that bar popping up before.   On preview it still shows up as just a name with a "@" in front of it.   


Edit:

For some reason when you save it,  it converts to that "Member="  format.   I never bothered saving it before because it never looked right in preview.   

[Jazzhead]

You should keep up.  The accuser's stories are being contradicted by facts and other  witnesses.   What are you going to do when the accusers are discredited?   You've already accepted what they claimed as the truth,   and it looks like you have prejudged the man.

  I've carefully read the WaPo article, and I believe the accusations are credible.   So do a whole host of other Republicans and conservatives.  That's why I'm proud to be a Republican - lots of us see exactly what's wrong and despicable about resorting to the Clinton playbook to smear and discredit these accusers.   

   If you can,  take the time to read Peggy Noonan's column this week.   And think long and hard about what is lost and cannot be regained when you defend the ends as justifying the means.   

[DiogenesLamp]

I've argued that the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection extends to gays who want to marry their adult partners under the civil law. 

And that is an opinion that is not shared by people who understand correct law before Roosevelt's kook judges tampered with it.   


Prior to activist judges from the Roosevelt era re-interpreting constitutional law in a manner never done before,   it didn't mean any such thing as normalizing homosexuality at all.    Homosexuals were considered mentally ill,  and they had no rights to engage in homosexual behavior.   In fact,  it was illegal.

[Jazzhead]

And that is an opinion that is not shared by people who understand correct law before Roosevelt's kook judges tampered with it.   


Prior to activist judges from the Roosevelt era re-interpreting constitutional law in a manner never done before,   it didn't mean any such thing as normalizing homosexuality at all.    Homosexuals were considered mentally ill,  and they had no rights to engage in homosexual behavior.   In fact,  it was illegal.

Is that what you consider the proper conservative position on homosexuality?   Lock 'em up as mental defectives? 

[Frank Cannon]

@RetBobbyMI

Oh, come on, don’t stop at “you’re stupid if you don’t agree with me.”  Let’s go full Freep, turn off our thinking completely, and call for a ban on anti-Moore speech.

@CatherineofAragon your irritating me. I made a great joke on this thread poking fun at Roy and not a peep from you, but heaven forbid I say something mildly complimentary about him and you are all up in my grill. You're a kooky broad.

[DiogenesLamp]

  I've carefully read the WaPo article, and I believe the accusations are credible. 

They were designed to appear credible.    I have the opposite reaction to the Washington Post.   If it appears in that publication,  it is automatically adjudged to be lies,  so far as I am concerned. 


The accusations are falling apart.   They are being contradicted by the testimony of other people.   

   If you can,  take the time to read Peggy Noonan's column this week.   And think long and hard about what is lost and cannot be regained when you defend the ends as justifying the means.   

I will read nothing that Peggy Noonan writes.    She supported Barack Obama,   and for that despicable act,   I will detest her for evermore.   


She can go to Hell.   She has lost any ability to convince me of anything. 

[DiogenesLamp]

Is that what you consider the proper conservative position on homosexuality?   Lock 'em up as mental defectives?

I am telling you what the law was before Roosevelt's kook judges buggered it up.  (Literally.)   

You might not like the fact that this is how the law regarded homosexuality,   but it is the truth none the less.   

[skeeter]

  I've carefully read the WaPo article, and I believe the accusations are credible.   So do a whole host of other Republicans and conservatives.  That's why I'm proud to be a Republican - lots of us see exactly what's wrong and despicable about resorting to the Clinton playbook to smear and discredit these accusers.   
 

I would love for you to detail exactly what you see are the similarities between the Moore and Clinton cases. Please be as detailed as you like. But facts only.